Leon

Do you mean to say you ordered 12 timeserts, not 10? There are 12 valves...

A bit defensive are we? I think you took Tony's post the completely wrong way...

Looks like a Nissan Motorsports header to me.

John was speaking of a megaphone at the collector. One at the end of an exhaust pipe will have a much diminished effect. We did not squeeze the throat down, as that will reduce performance because of an increase in pumping losses. As John has also mentioned, run as big of a pipe off the megaphone as possible. There's no point in creating pumping losses when you don't need to. The resonance effect is what 2-stroke engines use in order to have any sort of powerband, and the effect is similar on a 4-stroke. The physics of it aren't really like the way you describe, as a properly tuned exhaust "scavenges" the cylinder. The megaphone reflects compression waves all the way down its length, turning them into expansion waves. At a certain rpm bandwidth these expansion waves hit the exhaust valve just before it closes, drawing out more burned gasses, dropping the pressure in the combustion chamber, which then admits more air/fuel mixture. Intake tuning is the opposite, with compression waves increasing intake pressure causing a "ram" (or "supercharging") effect. An intake bell-mouth is the analogue to an exhaust megaphone. A properly designed intake-exhaust combo will do wonders!

Yes, it does. The megaphone is placed at the section of pipe where you want the resonance effect. The calculations are somewhat involved, but in a nutshell, the closer the megaphone is to the exhaust valve, the higher the design rpm range. Length and taper determine bandwidth and magnitude. Our FSAE engine had a megaphone at a calculated pipe length and the muffler afterwards, also at a calculated length. Dyno showed very significant gains when combined with our intake design (10-15% across the board).

PM'd

Rich mixtures cause exhaust manifold glowing, since the extra fuel burns in the exhaust. Retarded timing will also lead to hotter EGTs.

Has anyone bothered to hook up a timing light and check actual timing?

Exactly. The nut is tight as hell though. I replaced a turbo 3.54 (or maybe it was a '75) with a 3.9 and elected to simply swap driveshafts, instead of swapping input flanges. The turbo/'75 280Z input flange has a wider bolt pattern with 10mm bolts and the rest have 8mm bolts.

How technical do you want to get? Two of my favorites are Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals by Heywood (AKA the IC engine bible) and Race Car Vehicle Dynamics by the Milliken brothers. Both are great books. A shorter, less "engineer-y" one I like is the Brake Handbook, among many others. Have fun!

The little guy in the middle? Just soak in penetrant and tap out with hammer. The one you have to worry about is called the spindle pin, use that as a search term. By the looks of your strut housing, you're in for a treat!

It's simple enough to check yourself, as far as the diff goes. Here's some transmission gearing info, among many other sources. Looks like it should be a 3.9 with the "late" ZX 5-speed.

OP, I provided a link to the free FSM in my first post. Download and start reading.

To answer your original question, the yellow wire is energized only during starting. I'm not too familiar with the particular FI system, but as NewZed alludes to, it may have something to do with cold start enrichments.

Looking at the wiring diagram, I would say "B" stands for battery. It's the power feed from the battery to the ignition switch.

You lucky guy! I'm looking to get a new DD within the next 6 months or so, and all three of those are on my list. I've been craving the S2000 for a long time, but the M is tempting (I'm itching to drive an S4 as well). Thread derailed, haha!

That cam doesn't seem street friendly at all. It will have a rough idle and develop torque higher in the powerband, making it a peakier, higher strung engine when compared to a somewhat stock L-series. To me, it seems more like a race-track only cam. Unless you plan to race this car and built the engine to sustain high rpm running, I don't see a reason to go with a high compression ratio and wild cam. When people refer to "dynamic compression" what they're really referring to is the intake valve closing event. The later the intake valve closes, the less cylinder pressure there is during low speed operation. With a later intake valve closing point, the cylinders will fill best at a higher rpm so cylinder pressure will be at a maximum at higher engine speeds. The idea is that by moving maximum cylinder pressures (also decreasing cyl. pressure at low rpm) to a higher rpm, the engine will be less likely to detonate because there is less time for the heat transfer that precludes detonation to occur.

Surprisingly, I've never noticed that! Really makes me want to install my Clifford header, but the flange is warped...

There are no MAP or MAF sensors in the stock system. Get the FSM and start troubleshooting.

The ES setup is not adjustable. My statement applies to eccentric bushings, which you can use if toe is slighty out. Has the car been dropped down and rolled around/driven a little bit to let the suspension settle? Were the joints torqued with the wheels loaded? 260DET makes a good point. Before thinking that it's out, take it to an alignment shop (or get creative on your garage floor if you're savvy). The Z is curvy so looks definitely are deceiving.

Rear toe is not adjustable on the stock 280Z. If the bushings are eccentric, then they are not oriented correctly. Otherwise, you may have a bent control arm, bent frame, warped mounts or combination thereof.

Your valves hit the pistons due to incorrect timing or there is something lodged in a combustion chamber.

You may have a point Tim, I had restrictor design stuck in my head. The important effect of taper in the case of starting big and decreasing as you approach the head is the bandwidth/magnitude. A longer and slower taper increases bandwidth while decreasing magnitude of VE gain, and a shorter but steeper taper will do the opposite. An rpm range must be specified in order to properly design an intake manifold.

Which is funny because you have to take off about an 1/8" total from the poly bushings to make them fit, at least in my case! Your bushings may fit perfectly without washers.

That's exactly the fallacy I spoke of earlier. What you describe is physically impossible. Precisely! If you have a car with a heavy rear weight bias, the rears can actually be doing more work than the fronts in a turn. John points out very clearly how whether it's front or rear wheel drive, you are compromising lateral traction for acceleration on one set of wheels. It all comes down to adapting what you have to the intended use. You can make a FWD handle well and you can make a RWD handle well. People who don't understand vehicle dynamics love to make up things and perpetuate fallacies like "RWD rules because the fronts can turn and rears can accelerate" or "FWD always understeers." It's knowing what you have and how you can make it do what you want it to do that will make a car handle properly.